Jari, Mark,
I believe the reasons you have listed below are fine, but I was
wondering about the NetLMM work and whether that should fit into this
work as well given the fact that this protocol (PMIP) is based on MIPv6
and there are a number of issues related to the interaction of MIPv6 and
PMIP being discussed right now?
Is the reason for not merging the NetLMM WG with the others that it's a
network based mobility solution whereas the others are host-based?
/Conny
Jari Arkko wrote:
Hi all,
We are planning to reorganize the MIP6, MONAMI6, and NEMO
working groups in the Internet Area. The idea is to merge
these three groups, all of which work around the Mobile IPv6
protocol and its extensions. The merge will not happen
immediately, but around the IETF69 time frame when
MIP6 has completed a few more of its work items, MONAMI6
has submitted its main specification, and NEMO has gotten
on its way with its newly chartered work. The resulting
working group will be bigger, but still committed to
completing work on all three aspects, i.e., base features,
support for multiple care-of addresses, and network
mobility. The chartered work items or their planned
delivery dates will not be changed because of this.
The reasons why we are making this change include
- Putting most of work around Mobile IPv6 and its extensions
into one place, reducing the need to coordinate, and
making it easier for new people and outsiders to see
where this work is happening.
- The bigger group makes it easier to find reviewers,
and have a complete picture of how the protocol is
being extended.
- Provide a better ability to prioritize work and maybe
add some competition for resources.
- Easier management for the ADs, needing to deal with
one instead of three groups.
- Make room in the meeting schedule and area for BOFs
and new groups. I have groups meeting at the same
time in Prague, for instance.
- This is a good time for this change in the lifecycle
of the three groups.
The detailed implementation of this change will take place
in the coming months, but we wanted to give everyone a heads-up
that this is going to happen. And an opportunity for comments,
we do appreciate feedback on this and other issues relating
to the management of the area. Speaking of comments -- this
note goes out to a number of lists, but please direct further
discussion to myself and the int-area list.
Jari and Mark
_______________________________________________
Monami6 mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
